ht> 



I » 



Jes 



of -th^ T^ 
£mlar 





Hollinger 

pH 8.5 

MiU Run F03-2245 



Dfl 18 

i.fl3 
Copy 1 



The Origin and the Results of the Imperial 
Federation Movement in England 



GEORGE BURTON ADAMS, PH. D. 
Professor of History in Yale University 




[From Proceedings of The State Historical Society of Wisconsin, iS 



MADISON 

State Historical Society of Wisconsin 

1899 






1> h\% 



^H ^■ 



O 



39991 



THE ORIGIN AND THE RESULTS OF THE IMPERIAL 
FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND.' 



BY GEORGE BURTON ADAMS, PH. D. 

During the last half of the present centui'y, a great charge has 
taken place in the feeling of the people of England in regard to 
the Colonies and the Empire. Before 1850, so great was the 
prevailing indifference that it was exceedingly difficult, if not 
impossible, to arouse public opinion on any question of colonial 
policy. At present, scarcely any subject exists of greater in- 
tei'est to the mass of Englishmen. Before that date, and in- 
deed for many years afterwards, the colonies were looked upon 
almost solely as sources of wealth to England, or as safely-distant 
places into which could be drained the superfluous, the desti- 
tute and burdensome, and even the criminal population of the 
mother country. Now, the conception of colonies as a mere 
commercial investment, or a kind of a social pest house, has 
entirely passed away, and the nation has come to realize that 
they are a source of wealth which cannot be entered in the 
ledger, and of moral health not measured in the statistics of 
crime. v'And the vision of new Englands in many regions of 
the globe, filled with prosperous and patriotic Englishmen, des- 
tined in the future greatly to exceed in wealth and numbers the 
parent state, is gradually changing also the idea of the Empire. 
Anglo-Saxon empire is coming to mean no longer, as it once did, 
mere geographical expansion or mere political conquest and rule, 
but rather the one race in all its scattered homes, united by pride 
in a common ])ast, by the possession of a common civilization, 
and by common aspirations for the future. It is coming to mean 
less the territories which the Anglo-Saxon occupies, wher- 
ever they may lie on the map, than the political liberty and free- 
dom of opportunity for all which he is there working out, or 

' Biennial Address delivered befor j the State Historical Society of Wis- 
consin, February 22, 1899. 



Q4 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

the training in the best of his possessions which he is impart- 
ino" to inferior races. 

This new idea of empire, as the united race and its common 
inheritance, has begun most happily to extend beyond England 
and her present colonies, and to take in us who once were 
colonies. It has led to the idea of the race as above the nation, 
of a kinship superior to artificial boundary lines, and was one 
of the chief causes of that helpful friendliness so often extended 
to us during our war with Spain. 

A change so full of interest to us as this, and so fraught 
with the highest good to all the world (if it leads, as it may 
very likely do, to a common Anglo-Saxon policy, generously con- 
ceived and pursued in close alliance), is one of the most important 
that has ever occurred in history. What are the causes which 
have brought it about? 

The subject to which I would invite your attention to-night, 
is the history of one of the strongest influences creating this new 
consciousness of race unity, the so-called imperial federation 
movement in England. While this movement was in the main 
confined to England, and was wholly concerned with the relation 
of England to hei" colonies, the new conception which it helped 
to create has not been so confined, and the recent expression of 
it to which I have just alluded has aroused among us something 
at least of a response, and may not impossibly lead to results 
which will give the imperial federation movement a direct 
bearing on our future history. 

The question of the proper form of an imperial government, 
including in one system England and her colonies, is one that 
did not arise until long after the founding of the American 
colonies, but it has been more or less constantly discussed for 
a century and a half. It was the heavy expense of the long 
struggle with France, that first gave rise to the question 
whether the English parliament could not exercise more direct 
powers ©f government in the colonies than it had hitherto done. 
The answer which was returned to this question, we are not 
likely to forget. The stamp act and the tax on tea were clumsy 
experiments in imperial government, and led, with what they 
necessarily implied, to a result which England ought to have 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. 95 

anticipated had she I'emembered her own history in the seven- 
teenth century, and recognized the fact that the American 
colonists were likely to preserve the spirit and insist upon the 
rights of their ancestors. In recent years the English peoj^le 
have come to- do justice to the colonial cause, and to understand 
how inueh they themselves gained from our successful resistance 
to the will of George Til. It is true also, that since England's 
return to a policy of self-government in the colonies, she has 
drawn from her experience in America a valuable lesson in 
present colonial government. But for almost a hundred years, 
the memory of the American Revolution exei'cised an influence 
upon the relation of England to her colonies unfortunate for 
both. This influence in some particulars I have attempted to 
trace elsewhei'e.^ I shall refer to it here, onh?^ as one of the 
important causes of that feeling in the English official world 
in regard to colonial relations, which finally became so strong and 
so nearly carried out in practice as to bring about a popular 
reaction which led immediately to the rise of the idea of im- 
perial federation. 

The first effect of the American Revolution seems to have 
been a very general fear that a liberal policy in the govern- 
ment of the colonies would result in their throwing off their 
allegiance and proclaiming themselves independent, as the 
American colonies had done. Naturally, the English govern- 
ment determined to prevent the anticipated result, and naturally 
also, holding this belief, it sought to do so by maintaining 
a strict control of the colonies from the home office; for, as an 
advocate of this policy wrote in 1813. " it cannot be too often 
or too seriously pressed, that a firm adherence to a restrictive 
policy alone can secure the allegiance of the colonists and the 
advantages which they bring to the mother country. " - This 
policy, applied to Canada, was one of the chief causes of the 
Rebellion of 1837 ; and it led to so plain an exhibition of the 
temper of the colonists that England was persuaded to abandon 
it, and free self-government was granted to Canada. The same 

^Report of the American Historical Association for 1896, vol. i, 
pp. 373-389. 
^Anonymous pamphlet, Considerations on Colonial Policy (1813), p. 14. 



q6 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

favoi' was granted a little later, and with some further hesita- 
tion, to the Australian colonies. 

But, though the policy of strict government from home was 
dropped, the English official world was not converted from 
the belief that the colonies were destined to inevitable inde- 
pendence. The first result of granting self-government to them, 
was rather to strengthen this belief. It was the reigning opin- 
ion at the middle of this century, that in allowing the colonies 
to govern themselves, England had consented to the first steps 
towards independence, and that the experience which the col- 
onists would gain in managing their own affairs would soon 
lead them to demand complete separation from the mother 
country. So reconciled did the public become to this view of 
the case, that it even came to be generally believed that the 
real object of colonial self-government should be to train the 
colonists in the conduct of government, as a preparation for 
future independence. This fact cannot be put more exactly than 
in the words of Mr. Arthur Mills, in the introduction to his 
work on colonial constitutions, published in 1856. He says: 
" To ripen those communities to the earliest possible maturity, — 
social, political, and commercial, — to qualify them, by all the 
appliances within the reach of a parent State, for present self- 
government, and eventual independence, is now the universally 
admitted object and aim of our colonial policy."' Says Lord 
Bury, afterwards Earl of Albemarle, in a work on colonial 
history published in 1865, speaking of the same fact: "So wide 
spread is this belief that our whole colonial policy is based on 
the assumption that our colonies will at some future time desire 
to become independent nations; and that we have learned the 
lesson taught by the war of American independence too well to 
prevent them even if we could. " ^ 

Interesting evidence of the extreme form of this belief is 
found in the fact that Lord Bury, in the work just quoted, and 
Mr. Thring, afterwards Lord Thring, a subordinate officer of 
the government, in a publication of the same year, both sub- 
mitted plans to be adopted in advance, by which the independ- 

1 Mills, Colonial Constitutions, p. Ixix. 

" Lord Bury, Exodus of the Western Nations, ii, p. 17. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. 97 

ence of a colony might be legally declared whenever it should 
wish, and the new nation launched upon its career with the 
blessing of the parent state. ^ 

While this belief was held by most public men, and by many 
writers on colonial subjects from the early part of the century, 
its influence was combined with that of another theory before 
it began to affect the practical action of the government. This 
was the doctrine that the colonies were nothing but a burden, 
and that it would be better for England to be rid of them. 

It is impossible to trace here in any detail the rise and 
growth of this doctrine, interesting as it might be to do so. 
It undoubtedly had its origin, like the other idea, in the trou- 
bles of the American revolutionary period. Briefly stated by 
Adam Smith, just as the war was beginning, ^ and by Dean 
Tucker a little later, '^ it received still more complete and strik- 
ing development from Jeremy Bentham, in 1793, in a paper 
addressed to the revolutionary government in France, but not 
published at the time. After an interval of about thirty years, 
the idea again made its appearance, and this time apparently 
with some considerable popular support.* It appeared in the 
reviews, and was heard in the House of Commons. A writer 
in the Quarterly Review of January, 1822,^ considered the no- 
tion prevalent enough to deserve an answer, and indicated its 
character by saying: "It may not be amiss to advert to some 
objections occasionally advanced against these dependencies 
altogether. It is sometimes insisted that colonies are burdens; 

^ Lord Bury's plan, given in his Exodus of the Western Nations, vol. 
ii, pp. 459-463, provided for independence by a treaty between England 
and the colony. Mr. Thring's plan was stated in a pamphlet which I have 
not seen, entitled Suggestions for Colonial Reform, As given by Lord 
Bury, Exodus, ii, 457, it provided for independence by royal proclamation. 

:' The Wealth of Nations, book iv, chap. 7. 

^ See his pamphlet made up of letters addressed to Necker, entitled Cm 
bono, especially letters v and vi, and the postscript. 

■* It was not possible within the limits of this address to discuss the rela- 
tion of this idea to the movement for the removal of trade restrictions, nor 
of Cobden's to the free trade movement. I hope to give this part of the 
subject more adequate treatment on some future occasion. 

» Vol. 26, p. 523. 



qS WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

and that the wealth and strength of a country would be in- 
creased by seeking the productions of detached states and set- 
tlements of other countries. " A few weeks later in the same 
year, in a debate in the House of Commons on a petition from 
Canada, Sir I. Coffin said: "It would have been a good thing 
for this country if Canada had been sunk to the bottom of the 
sea. It cost this country £500,000 per annum, and did not 
make a return to it of 500 pence. * * * The sooner the 
governor was called home, and the sooner the assembly and 
colony wei^e suffered to go, — he should be sorry to say au diable, — 
the better. " ^ In the next year the House of Commons listened 
to the same doctrine from Mr. D. Hume, who maintained that 
" it was obvious that the colonies, instead of being an addition 
to the strength of the country, increased its weakness."^ In 
1825 the Edinburgh Reviev)^ said: "We defy anyone to point 
out a single benefit, of any sort whatever, derived by us from 
the possession of Canada, and our other colonies in North 
America. They are productive of heavy expenses to Great 
Britain, but of nothing else." And the next year the same 
Reviexo added :^ "We have no hesitation ia saying, that instead 
of being of any value to England, it would have been better 
for her, had Canada, Nova Scotia, etc., continued to this hour 
in the possession of their aboriginal savages. " 

1 will not multiply these quotations, though it might easily 
be done; but it is especially interesting that Jeremy Bentham's 
tract, in which he had tried to persuade the French revolution- 
ists to abandon their colonies, and which had remained for a 
whole generation unpublished, was pat into circulation in Eng- 
land, for some reason, in 1830.^ A party advocating these views 
had already begun to form itself, and was no doub-t encouraged 
and strengthened by Bentham's striking argument. It is to be 
noticed also that this tract was published just at the beginning 

^ Parliamentary Debates, 2d series, vol. 6, col. 1076. 

2 76id., vol. 8, col. 250. 
s Vol. 42, p. 291. 

"■ Vol. 43, p. 350. 

^ Emancipate your Coloiiies! Addressed to the National Conven- 
tion of France, Ao 1793. Now first published for sale (London, 1830). 
Included also in vol. iv of Bentham's Works. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. QQ 

of the most dangerous ci'isis in English colonial government 
since the American revolution — the culmination of the struggle 
in Canada. That danger was overcome, however, not by aban- 
donino- Canada altogether, according to the doctrine of this new 
party, but by a wise and generous yielding to her wishes, which 
speedily restored her shaken loyalty. 

With the rise of the free-trade movement, this doctrine of the 
misfortune of possessing colonies received the powerful support 
of the Manchester school of economists and politicians, and es- 
pecially of Mr. Richard Cobden. In both his speeches and his 
political writings he is continually recurring to the subject. 
Nothing but the foreign policy of England is so foolish and in- 
sane as her colonial policy. Cobden's view of the question is 
entirely that of the economist. His only standard by which to 
measure the value of colonies, is that of shillings and pence.' 
The fearful burden of taxes; the maintenance of an unnecessary 
army and navy; the enormous debt; the necessity of economy; 
the possibility of the fate of Spain overtaking the nation which 
is immolating its natural greatness on the shrine of trans-At- 
lantic ambition,'^ these are the reasons which he urges for an 
immediate dissolution of the Empire, and for abandoning the 
colonies to themselves, apparently without inquiring what their 
wishes might be in the matter. They are able, he says, to take 
care of themselves. Evidently no vision arose before his mind 
of a diminishing national debt and enormously increasing na- 
tional wealth, going hand in hand with an undreamed of colo- 

'" Three hundred millions of permanent debt have been accumulated, 
millions of direct taxation are levied annually, restrictions and prohibitions 
are imposed upon our trade in all quarters of the world, for the acquisition 
or maintenance of colonial possessions; and all for what? That we may 
repeat the fatal Spanish proverb — 'The sun never sets on the king of 
England's dominions.' For we believe that no candid investigator of our 
colonial policy will draw the conclusion, that we have derived, or shall de- 
rive, from it advantages that can compensate for these formidable sacri- 
fices." — Political Works, vol. i, p. 26. 

- " Spain lies, at this moment, a miserable spectacle of a nation whose 
own natural greatness has been immolated on the shrine of trans- Atlantic 
ambition. May not some future historian possibly be found recording a 
similar epitaph on the tomb of Britain." — Political Works, vol. i, p. 25. 



^ 



100 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

nial expansion. One would like to know if he would still meas- 
ure the value of Canada and Australia to England by the balance 
of trade alone. ^ 

Vigorous as was the argument of Mr. Cobden against the 
colonial policy of England, it was surpassed in frankness and 
completeness, near the end of his life, by a younger member of 
the Manchester school, Mr. Goldwin Smith, then Professor of 
Modern History in the University of Oxford. He first pub- 
lished his argument in a series of letters to the London Daily 
Ne%08 in 1862, and in the following year as a volume, with an 
introduction and some additions, under the title of The Empire. 
In the way of actual argument the letters contained but little 
that was new, except in relation to recent events. The reason- 
ing was very largely that of Bentham and Cobden, but it was 
developed and enforced with all the remarkable dialectic skill 
of the author, and made attractive by the graces of his style. 

From the appearance of the first letter, this skillful reasser- 
tion of the doctrine that England ought to look to her own in- 
terests alone, and lay aside all responsibility for the colonies, 
attracted much attention and led to much discussion both in 
England and in the colonies. Undoubtedly it strengthened the 
official class, especially the leaders of the Liberal party, in their 
belief that colonial independence was certain to come at no dis- 
tant day. On the general opinion of England, in so far as it 
can be inferred from the press, it seems to have had an effect 
opposite to that intended by the author. It was interpreted as 
an attack on the integrity of the Empire, especially dangerous 
because so able, and it awakened a spirit of opposition and a 

1 A representative of the Manchester school has denied that they ever 
entertained a feeling of contempt for the colonies. This of course depends 
largely upon what one considers a feeling of contempt, and the colonies 
are hardly likely to have had the same view of the case as those who held 
the opinions of Cobden. Probably almost any one would admit, however, 
that the following words of Mr. Cobden, written in 1836, come near to 
proving the accusation: "The colonies, the army, the navy, and the 
church, are only appendages of our aristocratical government. John Bull 
has for the next fifty years the task set him of cleansing his house from 
this stuff." — Quoted from Geffeken, The, British Empire, p. 53. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. lOI 

determination to maintain the colonial connection, which must 
be regarded as the first step towards the federation movement. 

So long, however, as ideas of this sort were confined to theo- 
retical writers like Bentham and Goldwin Smith, or to politicians 
accustomed to use extravagant language but not responsible for 
the actual conduct of colonial affairs, like Mr. Cobden, the sound 
public sense of England was not likely to take alarm. The let- 
ters of Prof. Goldwin Smith called forth considerable discussion 
in newspapers and reviews, in which the cause of the Empire 
was quite as ably maintained as the cause of disintegration; but 
for some years the debate remained purely academic. It was 
only when real anxieties arose regarding the safety or the loyal 
feeling of the colonies, combined with evidence that the minis- 
try of the day were disposed to put these theories into practice 
and turn the colonies adrift, that the people of England were 
sufficiently aroused to make their feeling known. 

Before the close of the decade in which Mr. Goldwin Smith's 
book appeared, two colonial questions had arisen which seemed 
to England of unusual importance, and which excited a general 
popular interest. The first of these was the defence of Canada 
against the danger to which she was believed to be exposed 
from the civil war then going on in the United States. The 
second, coming immediately on the heels of the other, was a" 
prolonged and difficult war between the natives of New Zealand 
and the colonists. The special questions arising in the course 
of this war gave rise to a general discussion of the fundamen- 
tal question — the proper attitude of the mother country to- 
wards her colonies. 

It was a series of events, however, in the year 1869 and the 
early months of 1870, which revealed to the nation that the 
theories of the certainty of colonial independence and of the 
disadvantage of colonial possessions had gene much further to- 
wards a realization in actual facts than anyone had supposed. 
In the New Zealand native war, the settlers were having, as 
they thought, a rather bad time of it, and they had earnestly 
appealed to the home government for aid, but without effect. The 
use of imperial troops had been refused them; even the single 
regiment which had been stationed in the colony, was withdrawn 



102 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

ill the middle of the war. The colonists had been denied the 
guarantee of a loan to meet their military expenses, and finally 
they were rather harshly informed that the home government 
considered itself under no obligation to assist them. The 
British troops were also withdrawn from the Cape Colony, and 
the Australians were told that only one regiment would be left 
in that island. Canada was informed through Sir John Young, 
that she might have independence for the asking.^ At a public 
meeting in London, Mr. Edward Wilson, "an eminent Austra- 
lian, said, among other things, that a letter which he had re- 
ceived and which he read to the meeting, proved that Lord 
Granville's private views were in favor of a policy of separa- 
tion between the colonies and this country."''^ That is, the sec- 
retary of state for the colonies was in favor of the dissolution 
of the Empire. In another meeting a few days later, Sir 
George Grey, lately Governor of New Zealand, said "that Lord 
Granville had intimated to one of the deputations on the sub- 
ject of New Zealand, that if New Zealand wished to break off her 
connection with this country, and thought it would be for her 
own advantage to do so, there would be no objection. " ^ 

In August of that year, certain distinguished colonists in 
London issued an invitation to the leading colonies to send 
deputies to a conference to meet in February of 1870 to discuss 
the question of future relations between England and the colo- 
nies, and stated in the call that the government appeared to 
have announced as its policy " that (except to the extent of par- 
tial protection in case of foreign war with civilized powers) the 
mother country recognizes no responsibility for their welfare or 
safety nor any obligation to help them, even in circumstances of 
great danger and pressing need.^ To the meeting of this con- 
ference Lord Granville objected, and the London Times, in a 
leader on the call which had been issued for it, graciously in- 

1 The Spectator, Aug. 28, 1869, p. 1001. 

^Ihicl., Nov. 27, 1869, p. 1383. 

^Ibid., Dec. 4, 1869, p. 1414. 

* The invitation is dated Aug. 13, and is printed in the Times, Aug. 26, 
p. 9. Lord Granville's dispatch on the subject is dated Sept. 8, and is 
given in the Times of Dec. 17, p. 7. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. IO3 

formed the colonists that England could be called their mother 
country only in a historical sense, only in the sense in which 
Schleswig Holstein was the mother country of England.' These 
events were in 1861). 

Early in 1870, Mr. Alexander Gait, a Canadian political 
leader, received the honor of knighthood from the home govern- 
ment. As he was at that time a public advocate of the policy 
of independence for Canada, he was criticised for accepting the 
honor. In defending himself, he said that when the offer was 
fii'st made him he had informed the English government of his 
views on the subject of independence and had stated that if these 
views were inconsistent with the honor, he must decline to re- 
ceive it. He had therefore drawn the inference that his views 
were in accordance with those of the British cabinet — au infer- 
ence that would certainly need no argument when the honor 
followed such a declaration on his part.^ Later in the year, in 
the Canadian Parliament, "it was openly stated by Sir Alex- 
ander Gait, Mr. Huntingdon, and other prominent members of 
the Assembly, that it was with unfeigned regret that they 
had come to the conclusion that it was the deliberate intention 
of Her Majesty's ministers to bring about a separation between 
the two countries. " -^ In Canada and in the Cape Colony, the 
royal governors publicly discussed the separation of the colo- 
nies from England as something quite within the range of prob- 
ability.* 

These facts, becoming known within the space of a few 
months, were a sudden revelation to the British public that the 
government of Mr. Gladstone was preparing to act upon the 
theories which had so long been taught, and to force upon the 
colonies the independence which they ought to desire.'^ The 

1 The Times, Aug. 26, p. 8. 

'' The Spectator, Mar. 26, 1870 — vol. 43, p. 393. 

^ 2'he National Review, vol. v, p. 214. 

* The Nineteenth Century, vol. i, p. 810. 

^ I am not here concerned with the question whether the government's 
intention was in every particular correctly interpreted — probably it was so 
only in the main, — but with the causes of the popular feeling which gave 
rise to the idea of imperial federation. Of these the newspapers and re- 
views are better evidence than the blue books. 



104 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

effect of this revelation on the public was unmistakable. The 
judgment of the nation as a whole, which in the end controls 
the policy of cabinets and ministers, proved to be thoroughly- 
sound when it was brought to face the question, not as one for 
debate merely, but as a practical one demanding immediate 
action. Aroused public feeling brought itself to bear on the 
ministry, in aU the various ways which Anglo-Saxon public 
opinion has of making itself felt. There were letters to the 
TinieR and heavy articles in the reviews, and speeches and ques- 
tions in Parliament. Public meetings were held for the enlight- 
enment of the nation and the discussion of plans. There were 
deputations to the ministers, and protests from the colonies. 

It was the New Zealand question on which public opinion 
centred as the one demanding immediate settlement, and it 
was on this that thevictory was gained over the Liberal policy 
of dissolution. So evident and so decided was the general feel- 
ing, that it brought about a quick reversal of the ministerial 
policy in the matter, w The New Zealanders were allowed the 
use of imperial troops, and their loan was guaranteed — first of 
five hundred thousand pounds, and then of a million/ At the 
end of May, 1870, there was a leader in the Spectator on this 
sudden change of the cabinet's policy, which it called "the 
death-bed repentance of the colonial office," in which it said: 
" Ministers have changed their policy, have changed it abruptly, 
and have changed it for the best of all reasons — because they 
had begun to discover that their line was not the line of the 
people of England, and would, if pushed to its logical results, 
end in events which would bring down the bitter displeasure of 
the people of England. " ^ 

It was in connection with these event^ that the first discus- 
sion of imperial federation arose, at least in such a way as to 
attract attention to it as a plan that might prove practicable. 
There had been some incidental and not very definite sugges- 
tion of the possibility of a federation between England and her 
colonies, as early at least as the controversies to which Prof. 
Groldwin Smith's letters gave rise, but such suggestions had 

1 May 21, p. 632. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. 10^ 

attracted uo general attention, and the idea seems to have been 
regarded as a pleasant speculation merely, useful for purposes 
of debate, but hardly likely to be put into practical operation. 
The following passage from the Saturdaij Review of February 
15, 1802, may be taken as a fair specimen of these early ref- 
erences to the subject. It is a passage not without interest 
also, from the internal evidence which it affords of having been 
written during the American civil war. The writer, criticis- 
ing Mr. Smith's idea of a friendly separation, says: "Cer- 
tainly it is a bold assumption to take for granted the absolute 
certainty of a transaction [that is, friendly separation] the like 
of which had never been attempted since the world began. It 
would perhaps be less extravagant to imagine a continual ap- 
proach on the part of England and her colonies to the realiza- 
tion of some idea of Federal Empire, which the democratic ma- 
chinery of the United States has so signally failed to construct. " 
In the crisis of 1869 the subject was again referred to in a 
similar way, for purposes of debate, but with a greater definite- 
ness and clearness which showed that, in the thinking of the 
nation at least, some progress had been made. In an article 
in Frazil' 8 Magazine for January, 1870, in answer to objections, 
Mr. Froude wrote : ' " Neither the terms of the federation, the 
nature of the Imperial council, the functions of the local legis- 
latures, the present debts of colonies, or the apportionment of 
taxation, would be found problems hard of solution, if the apos- 
tles of laissez-faire could believe for once that it was not the last 
word of science." A few days before this article of Mr. Froude 
appeared, the Times said, in a leader on the colonial troubles: 
" Lord Granville and his colleagues are called upon to consider 
the whole subject, and either to extract a principle of govern- 
ment from the precedents they find recorded at the colonial 
office, or to throw over these traditions and devise a system of 
federal government without an example in the history of our 
Empire."^ These quotations, it will be seen, indicate some 
thinking on the subject, but not as yet any tendency to urge 

' Also in Froude's Short Studies, vol. ii, p. 173. 
2 The Times, Dec. 29, 1869, p. 6. 



I06 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

the actual adoption of a federal organization. This next step 
in advance was, however, immediately taken. 

In January, 1871, an article was published in the Contempo- 
rary Revieio, entitled "Imperial Federalism." It was by Mr. 
Edward Jenkins, the author of a clever sociological satire called 
"Ginx's Baby." The publication of this article is usually re- 
ferred to as the first definite date in the imperial federation 
(movement, and as giving it a name. What Mr. Jenkins really 
did in inventing the name, was to put together two words, 
both of which had been in frequent use in the discussions, of the 
preceding ten years, as in the passage quoted from the Satur- 
day Reviev) of 1862, where the expression is " a federal Empire. " 
In doing so, however, he certainly coined a most effective term, 
afterwards used in the slightly different form of " Imperial Fed- 
eration," and this helped to crystallize the ideas of the opponents 
of the government's policy and to form them into a party — no 
slight service at the time. This article and another ' which 
followed in the April number of the same review, were the first 
extended discussion of imperial federation, which Mr. Jenkins 
treated not as a mere academic theory, as it had hitherto been 
regarded, nor as an impossible dream, but as a practicable plan 
which England must be persuaded to adopt, if the Empire was 
to be saved from impending dissolution. The articles are an 
impassioned and vigoi^ous argument against the ministerial 
policy, and in favor of a close organization on the model of the 
federal systems in use in the United States and Canada. This 
was a more important service than the invention of a name, and 
Mr. Jenkins justly deserves the honor of beginning the imperial 
federation movement, as a movement with a definite aim and 
purpose. 

It was four years, however, from the appearance of these arti- 
cles before the proposal was taken up by any active politician 
as a measure with which he ventured to identify himself. Dur- 
ing the interval, the subject received frequent discussion in 
public meetings and in the press, ^ and a new colonial question 

^ Entitled An Imperial Confederation — vol. 17, pp. 60-79. 
2 A sketch of the discussion of this time will be found in Young, Im- 
■j. erial Federation, pp. 68-70. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. 10/ 

of the time also served to keep alive interest in the relation 
between home and colonial governments. This was the question 
of the annexation of the Fiji Islands, in which the English gov- 
ernment seemed for a time, as the Australian colonists thought, 
determined to sacrifice their interests.' 

Notwithstanding increasing interest in the subject, the fed- 
eration movement still lacked one most important support in 
the eyes of the average Anglo-Saxon. It had not as yet received 
the sanction, as I have said, of any one who could be called a 
practical statesman. As the Times said in 1884,'^ in a leader on 
the formation of the Imperial Federation League, speaking of 
the troublous times of J 869-70, "There were some even then 
who conteaded for the principles of a federal union between the 
mother country and her colonies, but the question was not re- 
garded as a practical one, and it would have been difficult to 
induce any politician of mark to identify himself with a project 
which seemed likely to remain a splendid but impracticable 
dream. " In other words, until taken up by some party leader 
whose political future might depend upon the cause he advo- 
cated, the federation plan failed to meet the test universally 
applied by all who speak the English language to every pro- 
posal — it was not practical. \/ 

This lack was at last supplied by Mr. W. E. Forster, the 
Liberal leader, who, in an address delivered in Edinburgh in 
November, 1875, announced his belief in the feasibility and 
wisdom of imperial federation, and urged it upon the attention 
of the nation.-^ It may have been, as some one said later, that 

' One point of interest in the debate on this question may be mentioned. 
The later fashion of denying or explaining away views not favorable to the 
Empire extended to Mr. Gladstone, but in his argument against the an- 
nexation of the Fiji Islands he comes very near to saying in explicit terms, 
he certainly implies, that the troubles which New Zealand had brought 
upon England were so great as to make the development of that most 
interesting and instructive of all colonies a public misfortune. One hardly 
knows in what terms to characterize such an opinion, and prefers to hope 
that Gladstone did not hold it. — See Pari. Debates, 3d series, vol. 221, 
cols. 1285-1286. 

2 July 30. 

3 Our Colonial Empire, printed in full in the Times of Nov. 6, p. 10. 



I08 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

at the time Mr. Forster was walk id g in the dry places of oppo- 
sition seeking rest and found Imperial Federation, but certainly 
the adhesion to the scheme of a statesman so popular and so 
universally respected gave the plan a dignity and influence 
which it had not before possessed. For a time, however, other 
public men seemed to hesitate to follow the example set by Mr. 
Forster, and no progress was made toward the actual adoption 
of a federal organization until early in the eighties, when the 
difficulties crowding upon the Empire in both foreign and 
colonial affairs created a strong, though apparently a temporary, 
current in favor of some immediate action. 

The step then taken was the organization of the Imperial 
Federation League, and the circumstances which brought this 
about are very significant and lend much sujDport, in my opin- 
ion, to the belief that if federation is ever adopted as the actual 
constitution of the British Empire, it is far more likely to 
be done in some moment of threatening danger, than as the 
result of any amount of discussion in peaceful times. These 
circumstances at home and abroa.1 are best stated in the words 
of Mr. Greswell, a writer of note on colonial subjects.^ He 
says: it was "a period of political unrest, agitation, and doubt. 
* * * Ireland, Egypt, and South Africa all contributed 
their share of anxiety at that time to the rulers of this country, 
and the English people themselves seemed to be walking along 
an endless valley of humiliation. Forces were at work which 
seemed powerful for evil, and in many places to make for 
rebellion, war and the disintegration of the Empire. The 
heart of the nation was touched to the core by the base de- 
sertion of G-en. Gordon in Egypt, and the ignominy was felt 
by our colonists to extend far beyond the frontiers of the 
Empire. In South Africa there had been an unparalleled record 
of disaster and disgrace, since 1879-80, and on the borders of 
the Transvaal, in Zululand, on the south west coast, and even 
in Kaffirland and Pondoland the good name of England had 
for several years been impeached. In Ireland the 'Cavendish' 
tragedy had for once stirred national sentiment to its utmost 

^ The National Review, vol. 14, p. 186. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. IO9 

depths and caused a tremor of apprehension to pass over the 
land. * * * Abroad and especially in the Pacilic and alono- 
the African coasts there seemed to be indications on the part 
of France and Germany of taking advantage of England's ex- 
traordinary misfortunes and we heard of annexations in many 
unexpected places. The Congo conference was really a snub to 
England and Prince Bismarck guided, if he did not head, the 
German craze for a colonial Empire. " 

Already, early in the year i-eferred to, 1884, some of the most 
devoted friends of imperial federation had reached the conclu- 
sion that the time had come for a forward step. They formed 
the plan of bringing together a conference of prominent men, 
without reference to party, but interested in maintaining the 
unity of the Empire, for the purpose of discussing the next 
move to be made to further the cause. This proposal received 
the hearty support of Mr. Forster, and .a voluntary committee 
was at once formed to carry it out. ^ It was the feeling excited 
by the difficulties besetting the nation which have just been re- 
counted that gave a general support to the idea of some imme- 
diate action, and it was in the spirit natural to such a time that 
the conference met at the end of July of this year. As de- 
scribed in the Times of the next day,- the conference " included 
representatives official, and unofficial, of all the more important 
colonies, and conspicuous members of both political parties at 
home. Mr. Forster was in the chair and was supported by 
Lord Roseberry, Lord Wemyss, Mr. W. H. Smith, Mr. Gibson, 
Mr. Stanhope, Sir Henry Holland, Mr. Cowen, Mr. Bryce. and 
other public men of every shade of opinion. Ex-governors of 
the principal dependencies of the crown, such as Lord Nor- 
manbj'', and Sir Henry Barkly, were there as well as military and 
naval officers of distinction to whom the defense of the Empire 
is a problem of the highest practical interest, and colonial Higli 
Commissioners and Ao-ents-g-eneral and ministers in laro-e num- 
bers. " 

The result of this conference was the organization of the Im- 
perial Federation League a few weeks later, witli Mr. Forster as 

' Labilliere, i^ecZera^ Britain, p. 28. 
- July .30. 



I 10 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

its first president. On the death of Mr. Forster not long after- 
ward, the Earl of Roseberry became its second president, and 
when he took office he was succeeded by Mr. Stanhope of the 
Conservative party. 

In reviewing the work done by the league, and passing judg- 
ment on it, it is well to know just what it undertook to do, as 
stated in ihe resolutions adopted by the conference by which it 
was organized. The first of these declared, " that in order to 
secure the permanent unity of the Empire some form of Federa- 
tion is essential. " The second, declared the League organized 
" for the purpose of influencing public opinion, both in the 
United Kingdom and the Colonies, by showing the incalculable 
advantage which will accrue to the whole Empire from the 
adoption of such a system of organization. " ' It was in influenc- 
ing public opinion, if not in proving the particular thesis, that 
the great work of the League was done. The very organiza- 
tion itself, by bringing together in support of the project so 
large a number of the leaders of both parties, went far to 
produce upon public opinion a decided effect. 

Branches of the League were organized in different places 
throughout England and in Canada and Australia, while in South 
Africa a league which had already been formed for a similar 
purpose, called the Empire League, joined the alliance. A 
monthly journal was established, and named Imperial Federation^ 
to advocate the measures of the League, which continued in 
publication for a time after the League itself had been dissolved. 
In 1887 the government, at the suggestion of the League, called 
a conference of colonial representatives to meet in London, which 
discussed questions of common interest, though that of federa- 
tion was purposely excluded, and led as one result to the for- 
mation of the Australian naval squadron, — a beginning of colo- 
nial contributions to the permanent defense of the Empire. So 
successful was this conference, that two years later, in July, 
1889, the League took steps to induce the government to call 
another; but Lord Salisbury decided that circumstances were 
not favorable to such a conference, and declined to entertain the 

' Lord Brassey, Papers and Addresses ; Imjjerial Federation, p. 8. 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. I I I 

proposal. Two years later still, in 1891, a deputation of the 
League renewed the request, but Lord Salisbury again declined 
to issue the call. He suggested instead, that the League might 
perform a valur.ble service by drawing up a definite plan of fed- 
eration for the instruction of the public' In response, the 
League appointed a distinguisheJ committee which formulated 
a somewhat general plan and presented it to Mr. Gladstone, 
who had then succeeded Lord Salisbury as prime minister.^ 
Though the second conference desired by the League did not 
meet, the very useful conference of 1894, which was held in 
Canada, may be regarded as in part at least a result of its activ- 
ity. These two precedents of successful conferences make it 
likely that others will be held in the future; and while they are 
hardly a step toward formal federation, — more likely on the 
whole to be an obstacle in its way, — they are of great service 
in maintaining and drawing closer the real unity of the Empire. 

Other less formal efforts during these years to interest the 
public in the purposes of the League, might be mentioned, like 
the prizes offered for essays on the subject, by the London Cham- 
ber of Commerce, and the tour which Mr. Parkin, a Canadian 
by birth, and one of the ablest advocates of federation, under- 
took of all the principal colonies, to awaken interest by holding 
public meetings which he addressed. 

After a few years of activity, it became evident that there 
were very decided differences of opinion among the members of 
the League as to the specific objects desired, and that efforts to 
advance any particular plan in the future would be very greatly 
embarrassed by these differences, even to the injury of the gen- 
eral cause to which all were ready to subscribe.-^ So pronounced 
had these differences finally become, that the most devoted friends 
of federation were driven to the conclusion that the real pur. 
poses of the League would best be served by its dissolution. 

^Ibid., chap. vi. 

^Ibid., chap. viii. For text of the report, see appendix iv. 

^ See an article on the dissolution of the League in the National Re- 
view, vol. 22, p. 814, and Lord Brassey, Imperial Federation, pp. 232, 
234. 



112 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

This was accordingly proposed in the spring of 1893, and form- 
ally accomplished in November of that year. Since that date 
there has been no organized body in existence whose object it 
is to further the adoption of an imperial federal government, 
and though the idea has been by no means abandoned, formal 
discussion of the subject has been less frequent. In a brief 
history of this movement, we may regard the dissolution of the 
League as the proper point at which to attempt a statement of 
the results which have been produced, though these have been to 
a considerable extent implied in what has already been said. 

First and most important as determining all that follows, is 
the awakened public opinion, the increased interest of the mass 
of Englishmen in the colonies, of which I spoke at the begin- 
ning of this address. This must not be understood to be the 
work of the League alone. It was rather the result of a 
variety of causes. It was behind the popular reaction against 
the policy of the Liberal cabinet of 1869, and of that reaction 
the League itself was one result. The change in the national 
feeling would have taken place to a great extent if the League 
had never been organized, but the service of the League in this 
direction was very important. Its peculiar mission was to set 
forth a definite plan to be reaMzed, and to urge its adoption by 
the Empire. A specific programme attracted wider attention 
than the mere expression of feeling or of personal judgment, 
however weighty. A practical object to work for, even if so 
difficult as the adoption of an untried system of government, 
created new interest and strengthened the feeling already ex- 
isting. To deepen interest into that determination, which 
Englishmen and colonists alike now profess, that the unity of 
the Empire must be made permanent, and if necessary by some 
form of political organization, was chiefly the work of the Im- 
perial Federation League. 

With this change has come in a truer estimate of the value-^of 
the colonies to England, not as mere producers of wealth, but 
as an expansion of the race, almost as a component part of the 
nation. The feeling of the colonies themselves is better under- 
stood, and the bond of union between them and the mother 
country is stronger and truer than when the government at- 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. II3 

tempted to draw it more close by constant interference. Origi- 
nating itself in a reaction against the policy of dissolution, the 
federation movement lias made that policy impossible for the 
future. No government will ever again venture to go so near 
to forcing independence on the colonies, without reference to 
their wishes and unknown to the public, as did that of Gladstone. 
The old belief, indeed, in the certainty of colonial independence 
has practically disappeared, and with it the doctrine that Eng- 
land should strive to make herself wealthier and happier by 
throwing off all outside responsibility and by seeking her inter- 
ests within the four seas alone. 

The force of this public opinion has had its natural and legit- 
imate effect upon the political parties. This is particularly 
noteworthy in the case of the Liberal party, most of whose leaders 
were at one time contaminated by anti-colonial theories. Now, 
only an occasional voice is lifted in that party in the old strain — 
never, I think, against maintaining the colonies, but only on 
the burden of Empire. In fact, so thoroughly has imperial unity 
come to be the policy of all England, that for many years, now, 
no practical difference in this particular can be distinguished in 
the public records of the two parties. 

If there is no longer any danger of the dissolution of the Em- 
pire from the action of an English cabinet, one further result, 
in part at least, of the imperial federation movement is, that 
there is also no further danger of the sort from the action of 
the colonies. The colonists were never, it is true, possessed 
with that desire for independence which the dissolution theories 
took for granted. Occasional prominent advocates of that pol- 
icy were to be found in some of the colonies about the middle 
of the century, like Dr. Lang of New South Wales and, for a 
time, Sir Alexander Gait of Canada, but their following was 
never large, and they would find even less to-day. While the 
colonists themselves were never active in support of imperial 
federation, except in individual cases, the discussion awakened 
their attention anew to the advantages of their connection with 
England, and revealed to them the strength of the feeling of 
imperial patriotism at home, and of pride in the colonies which 
they had not always had reason to suspect, at least from the 



114 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

action of the government. One evidence of the new feeling of 
the colonies towards the Empire, especially significant because 
almost unknown in the past, is their greater interest in its de- 
fense and their willingtiess to make contributions to it, like the 
recent offer of the little colony of Natal to supply coal free of 
cost to Her Majesty's war ships that may call for it. Tf the 
time should ever come, it has been said, when the colonies de- 
sire imperial federation and ask for it, then it will be realized; 
and we may add, that it will probably not be until that time 
does come; but such a desire is likely to arise whenever a closer 
organization and a more centralized command of all resources 
seem to the colonies necessary to their safety. 

The members of the Imperial Federation League did not suc- 
ceed in answering all the objections which were advanced against 
their plan. Urged also, repeatedly, by their opponents to show 
why federation should be adopted, their only satisfactory answer 
was defense — a need not likely to be realized until it arises. 
Urged again to propose some practicable federal constitution, — 
as by Lord Salisbury in the instance mentioned, — they were 
able to answer only in general terms. But though the objec- 
tions stand in the record of the discussion unanswered, no diffi- 
culty has been suggested which is not likely to prove in prac- 
tice less of an obstacle than it seems in theory. 

As a matter of fact, it is not the existence of objections, 
however serious, nor the inability of the League to formulate a 
feasible plan, which has prevented the actual adoption of a fed- 
eral system. None of the objections so far advanced would be 
felt to be insuperable, if any urgent need existed of a federal 
government of the whole Empire. It is the absecce of any such 
need, the feeling that the Empire is safe as it is, that no pres- 
ent improvement is to be made by the proposed change answer- 
able to the possible inconvenience and difficulty of such an 
organization, that has prevented any experiment in actual federa- 
tion. If an imperative necessity ever arises, Anglo-Saxon 
political genius, which has already created at least one great 
and successful federation in the face of obstacles as serious and 
without the light of experience to show the way, can be trusted 



THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION MOVEMENT IN ENGLAND. II 5 

to overcome the difficulties and to form a single successful gov- 
ernment of the Empire. 

May I venture, in conclusion, to add a word of application to 
ourselves. Great as was the work of the federation movement, a 
greater remains yet to be done. The unity of the Anglo-Saxon 
race as a whole is a higher and nobler ideal for which to strive, 
than the unity of the British Empire, lofty as that conception is. 
To strive for the one, does not fall to us who are not citizens of the 
empire. The realization of the other is pre-eminently our work; 
and if it is ever accomplished it will be because we have willed 
it and determined that it shall be. Nothing that England can 
do will bring it about, except as her action may move us to 
decision. A single word of ours, like the word which we are 
told England spoke for us at the beginning of our war, would 
suffice, by its simple speaking, to establish a unity of the race, for 
the world would then know that danger to the least of our lands, 
or lo any protected land, would bring the whole race forward 
in its defense. And this is all that is needed. A federal gov- 
ernment is not necessary, nor even a formal alliance. Only a 
determined resolution, backed by ready power of action, that in 
the age which is now coming on, when the frontiers of the. 
races draw together and a struggle between them, if it comes, 
will be the last and the decisive one of history — a determined 
resolution that in such an age our race shall act as one in behalf 
of a civilization which is one. 

The old attack upon the Empire, whose history I have told, 
is past, but attacks have not ceased with the gaining of this 
victory. They are to-day no longer directed against unity and 
permanence, but against its morality. The cruelty and selfish- 
ness of conquest, the wickedness of expansion for mere trade, 
the demoralizing influence of ruling inferior races, these are 
the new charges, and the occasional voices lifted in this strain 
half a century ago have now become a full cry. The justice of 
these accusations no man can wholly deny. In the history of 
the British Empire there are many pages only to be read 
with shame. Our own history records a like story. If we are 
to undertake in the future still more difficult rule than in the 
past, we must acknowledge that in all probability we shall have 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

020 676 672 

Il6 WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 

occasion to blush for many things. Of the beginning we need 
not be ashamed. A war of mere conquest is one thing. A war 
begun in the interests of humanity, which entails still further 
obligations, is quite another. In meeting these obligations, if 
we are honest with ourselves, if we use our best men, if our 
rule is more for others than for ourselves, the time will come 
when our work will be worth all that it may cost, and be so re- 
garded by the world. 

The chorus of these accusers is in itself a most hopeful sign. 
It could no more have been possible, one hundred years ago, 
than the new idea of race unity, or the steamboat and the tele- 
graph, which make that unity actual. It is a sign of quickened 
and quickening conscience; and the man who joins the cry is 
performing, after his kind, a valuable service to the future. But 
surely that man is blind to his own times, who does not see that 
under this new attack the judgment and heart of the race are 
as sound as under the old. There is no determination which 
has grown so rapidly and so strongly in this nation in the last 
generation, and I believe the same to be true of England, as 
the determination to do justice ourselves to other men, to pro- 
tect the weak, to check wherever possible the merely rapacious, 
and to hold our institutions, our civilization, and our religion in 
trust for all men. With this resolution at heart, the nation may 
make mistakes; it may be badly led; it may not always be able 
to distinguish between the mere scheming of the politician and 
the line of true policy; nor always know how to do what it does 
know should be done; it cannot in a generation free itself from 
selfishness and greed. If we embark upon empire, we shall not 
do as well even as England does, and we shall suffer, and those 
we rule wilj suffer in consequence. But we shall learn, and we 
shall, at no distant day, do well. We are now ready, as I be- 
lieve, to go forward and to find our place in that empire of our 
race which, under Providence and with all of evil that it 
includes, is the greatest power for good in the world that his- 
tory has ever known. If we do go forward, may God grant 
that it be with our old watchword on our lips, and its new 
meaning in our hearts — "The Union, one and inseparable. " 



